Posts Tagged With: EO

WASHINGTON (AP) — Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio warned Tuesday that if Congress doesn’t pass immigration overhaul legislation, President Barack Obama may act on his own to legalize the 11 million immigrants already in the U.S. illegally.

Rubio, a potential presidential candidate and an author of the sweeping immigration bill that passed the Senate in June but stalled in the House, noted that the Obama administration took action a year ago to give legal status to many immigrants brought here illegally as children. He said without congressional action, the president might well be tempted to do the same for everyone else here illegally, too.

“I believe that this president will be tempted, if nothing happens in Congress, he will be tempted to issue an executive order like he did for the DREAM Act kids a year ago where he basically legalizes 11 million people by the sign of a pen,” Rubio said on “The Morning Show with Preston Scott” on Tallahassee radio station WFLA.

Rubio said the possibility highlighted the need for congressional action because the alternative would be legalization without benefits like border security and an E-Verify system to require employers to check their workers’ legal status.

“We can’t leave it, in my mind, the way it is because I think a year from now we could find ourselves with all 11 million people here legally under an executive order from the president, but no E-Verify, no more border security, no more border agents — none of the other reforms that we desperately need,” Rubio said.

The White House disputed Rubio’s comments.

Asked whether Obama would be “tempted” to issue executive orders as Rubio suggested, White House spokesman Bobby Whithorne said, “No. The only solution to this problem is for Congress to fix the broken immigration system by passing comprehensive reform.”

Rubio’s comments came with lawmakers back home in their districts for Congress’ five-week summer recess, which activists on both sides of the immigration issue are trying to use to make their case for or against action in the GOP-controlled House.

Under pressure from advocates for reform, several House Republicans have already indicated qualified support for a path to citizenship for the immigrants already here illegally, something that’s part of the Senate bill but opposed by many conservatives. Meanwhile those opposed to reform struggled to draw a crowd to a “Stop Amnesty Tour” event in Richmond, Va., Monday night.

But it remains unclear whether one side will clearly prevail come time for lawmakers to return to Washington in September, or what will happen then. GOP House leaders have said they plan to proceed with the immigration issue with single-issue bills, beginning with border security, so it remains to be seen whether they’ll get to the point of entering negotiations with the Senate on a package that could reach Obama’s desk.

Rubio’s comments Tuesday tracked with speculation sometimes heard from immigration activists on the left about how to move forward if Congress never sends Obama a bill. The possibility of pressuring Obama to take additional executive actions has been discussed, though most advocates with ties to the White House say it’s premature to focus on that idea.

New Mexico’s top law enforcement officers paid a visit to the State Capitol Thursday, with a message for the governor and state lawmakers.

30 of the state’s 33 county sheriff’s want to remind everybody that they are under oath to support the U.S. Constitution, and that includes the Second Amendment – the right to bear arms.

The sheriffs are clearly agitated by President Obama’s call for a ban on assault-style weapons and ammo clips bigger than 10 rounds.

“We’re not lawmakers, we’re sheriffs,” said Ken Christesen, San Juan County sheriff and chairman of the New Mexico Sheriffs Association. “That’s what we do, is enforce the law and defend the Constitution. We want to make sure that your rights as a citizen are protected.”

The sheriffs do support the President’s call for improved background checks for gun buyers , not just at gun stores but at gun shows and in private sales. But it’s the proposed gun ban that sticks in their craw.

I do agree with some points the President has brought forward,” said Santa Fe County Sheriff Robert Garcia. “But until a law is passed banning those guns, I’m sure we’ll have to deal with that. I don’t see that happening anytime soon.”

“I’m watching what’s going on very closely,” said Torrance County Sheriff Heath White. ” I want to reassure my citizens that I have their best interests in mind and I will do my job to the fullest extent.”

Estimates now are that there are 17 states with some type of freedom act for firearms.

Now states are getting into action, with several legislatures already developing bills that would simply pull the rug from under the president’s agenda by specifying that unconstitutional rules or regulations, or executive orders, won’t be allowed.
Rep. Kendell Kroeker of Wyoming introduced HB 104, The Firearms Protection Act, and spoke to WND about the bill.

“The new bill expands to any gun owned in Wyoming and any gun regulation handed down that has to do with banning automatic rifles, banning magazines or gun registration will not apply to any gun, so long as they stay in Wyoming.”

In Wyoming, they like to get right to the point, and the plan states, “An act relating to firearms; providing that any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state shall be unenforceable…”

Texas also has started its work, developing a plan to block enforcement of those efforts that are in violation of the Second Amendment, which notes that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

Texas Rep. John Otto, R-Dayton, filed HB553 on Wednesday to make it a misdemeanor for state or federal officials to “enforce or attempt to enforce any acts, laws, executive orders, agency orders, rules or regulations of any kind whatsoever of the United States government relating to confiscating any firearm, banning any firearm, limiting the size of a magazine for any firearm, imposing any limit on the ammunition that may be purchased for any firearm, taxing any firearm or ammunition therefore, or requiring the registration of any firearm or ammunition therefore.”

Missouri has also joined the fight. On Tuesday Rep. Casey Guernsey, R-Bethany, introduced HB170, a similar bill that would block state or federal enforcement of a wide range of unconstitutional federal restrictions on firearms. It also affirms the state’s authority to regulate firearms made and owned within Missouri and makes it a felony for any federal agent to attempt to enforce a federal regulation on those weapons.

Tennessee, South Dakota and South Carolina also have similar bills pending before their legislatures. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center indicate as many as a dozen more states could follow suit in the coming weeks.

Alaska also is planning an upgrade of its firearms freedom act too, much like the actions in Wyoming and Texas. Those existing Firearms Freedom Acts were adopted several years ago, and simply state that federal regulation of firearms made, sold and kept in the states is banned.

The federal government imposes regulations and licensing requirements under the Commerce Clause, which regulates commerce among the states. The states challenge that weapons that don’t cross state lines are exempt.

In Wyoming, the “upgrade” should get the attention of federal agents. It states any official charged, “upon conviction, shall be subject to imprisonment for not less than one year and one day or more than five years.”

The bill additionally tacks a $5,000 fine upon the official for violating Wyoming law.

==========================================================================The “Oklahoma 2nd Amendment Preservation Act” is now working its way through the Oklahoma legislature.
Introduced by state senator Nathan Dahm, this legislation puts Oklahoma shoulder-to-shoulder with Wyoming and Texas by putting federal gun-grabbers in check.
The language of the legislation is clear: “Federal acts, laws, orders, rules, regulations, bans or registration requirements regarding firearms constitute an infringement on the individual right [to keep and bear arms] in the Constitution of the United States…and are hereby declared to be invalid in the State of Oklahoma.”
The legislation mentions the “intent” of America’s “Founders” and the Constitution’s “ratifiers,” and sets forth the punishment for trying to enforce new gun control measures:
Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government or any employee of a corporation providing services to the United States government that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction…shall be punished by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections not to exceed five (5) years.
After reading this legislation, only one word comes to mind–FREEDOM.

Statement from Walmart by audio recording from their headquarters:“As of right now WalMart is not going to be making any new orders of ammo because of the upcoming decision on the Second Amendment. As of right now we are unsure of what new legislation might be coming, and because of this, we are suspending new orders. “We will continue to sell what is already in stock in stores and at our distribution centers, but any new orders will not be shipped until the issue is resolved.”

That rifle you have in your gun safe … the one you love to shoot … accurate as all get out … a real tack-driver … your machine gun.

Machine gun? you object … No, just a semi-automatic … an autoloader … one bullet for each pull of the trigger.

No, says Obama … an illegal machine gun.

Here’s how you could become a criminal with a stroke of a pen …
=============================================================================
President Obama, congressional Democrats and even some Republicans plan to push new gun-control legislation in the 113th Congress, but defenders of the Second Amendment fear Obama is poised to enact the restrictions through the Executive Branch if Congress is not cooperative.

John M. Snyder heads GunRightsPolicies.org and has worked for organizations from the National Rifle Association to the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. He said Obama and his allies have already chartered what regulatory course to pursue through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF.

“We have some confidential information that he may order the ATF to reclassify certain models of semi-automatic firearms as Title 2 guns under the Gun Control Act of 1968,” Snyder told WND. “What this would mean is that people could not obtain these without going through a terribly difficult process that includes registration of each firearm and paying a severe fee for the ownership of each one.”

Snyder said an even more drastic approach from Obama would be to try to ban semiautomatic weapons altogether.

“Also, there is the possibility that the administration could try to declare that semi-automatic firearms are fully automatic firearms or machine guns under this Title 2, in which case they would be banned because of an amendment that’s on the books, the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Snyder is referring to what’s known as the Hughes Amendment, which forbids the acquisition of any new fully automatic weapons or machine guns.

The possible strategy is not a new idea, according to Snyder. He said liberal groups have advocated the move for years, but Democrats have been reluctant to pursue it because of the massive public backlash that will ensue.

“This is an ongoing project of theirs, and they use a lot of these tragedies to try to advance their cause in a public relations sense. So far they’ve been unable to do that,” said Snyder. “It appears that the public is catching on to them and they know what their game plan is, generally speaking. So a lot depends on their frustration, the political situation at the time and a number of other factors, too.”

Even if the Obama administration were to bypass Congress by imposing new regulations, there is still one card left for pro-Second Amendment forces to play: The House of Representatives could remove funding for the ATF or abolish it completely. But would the House GOP actually do that? Snyder is confident it would.

“I wouldn’t be surprised. I think the House is really furious with the president,” Snyder said. “The Republicans would like to cut budgets of the federal government because they think the federal government is taking too much money and spending too much money, and a good place for them to cut would be in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. If there is strong enough public support against the activities of the federal government, the House of Representatives will develop a plan to slash the budget of the agency. I think it’s a real possibility.”

Galvanizing conservatives Dinesh D’Souza and John Sullivan’s documentary 2016: Obama’s America grossed a stellar $6.3 million as it expanded nationwide over the weekend, beating a trio of three new films.

The anti-Barack Obama film, opening last month in only a few theaters, now boasts a domestic cume of $9.2 million, the top gross of the year for a documentary (excluding nature films). Bully was the previous crownholder with $3.5 million.

Among other records, Obama’s America is now the top conservative documentary of all time, beating out Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed ($7.7 million).

Obama’s America — promoted heavily on talk radio and distributed by Rocky Mountain Pictures — timed its nationwide expansion to the Republican National Convention, which gets underway this week in Tampa, Fla.

Like this:

A member of Congress from Iowa, seeking re-election, has given a campaign stop audience in Iowa a hint about what he considers a possible solution for the laws and regulations that have been generated by the Obama administration: blanket repeal.

According to a report in the Messenger News, U.S. Rep. Steve King, who represents a portion of Iowa, made the suggestion this week at a stop in Humboldt.

He said he was thinking about introducing a bill, which if it became law, would repeal everything Obama has signed into law.

The issue arose as part of a conversation King, who is running against Democrat Christie Vilsack in the state’s 4th congressional district, was having over his plans to sue Obama over a White House decision to stop the deportation of some illegal immigrants.

“We’re going to defend the Constitution of the United States and the separation of powers,” King told the audience, according to the newspaper report, which estimated about 60 people were at the county fairgrounds event.

The legal action would address the executive order Obama issued to halt the deportation of illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. before they were 17 – and are not yet 30. Several other qualifications would apply.

King told the audience while the administration has discretion about what cases to prosecute, the president “does not have the ability to grant blanket amnesty to entire classes of people.”

The report said he reiterated his opposition to Obamacare and the massive federal spending that Obama has instituted.

Among the various agenda items from Obama that have proven controversial are Obamacare, the biggest tax increase in U.S., history, the new advocacy for open homosexuality in the U.S. military, and others.